Better line to disguise my hand?
1/3 NLHE 9 handed
Table is a fun Friday night, the game was full of fish and quite deep but the winning regs smelled tuna and now the game is getting worse. We're getting ready to book a win and leave.
V1 - Crusher LAG. Very competent winning player that studies spots and has taken courses and plays full time for profit. (not sure how profitable). BB. 300$.
V2 - Loose passive unknown. Been at the table a few orbits and sat down on my left. Hasn't shown any aggression, seems mostly FoF post. I opened 55's in CO, he called BTN and we went heads up to a board like K-7-2r I cbet OOP and he called, turn was a middling blank like a 6 and I barrelled pot and he folded AJo face up. 400$. CO.
V3 - Drunk splashy fish taking stabs here and there. Doesn't know me and is telling everyone I'm a nit and talking about how tight I am (been card dead). Calling down to trap, jamming A9o pre, stabs when he feels weakness. I opened AKo in LP vs him, he 3-bet me, I just flatted. Flop came K-6-5r, I checked, he bet, I x/called, turn K-6-5-3 FD, I check, he bets half pot, I x/raise huge setting up a river PSB shove, he calls. River is the worst card - K-6-5-3-4 bringing in the backdoor flush. It goes check-check and he has 45o. 300$. BTN.
--- Hero covers all from HJ ---
Folds to Hero in HJ who opens 2♥ 2♦ to 10, V2 calls CO, V3 calls BTN, V1 completes BB. 4-ways 2nd to act.
Flop 40 - Q♦ Q♠ 3♣
Checks through
Turn 40 - 2♣
V1 bets 35, Hero calls trying to bring V2 and V3 along, sadly V2 and V3 fold. HU IP.
River 110 - 9♦
V1 checks, I start playing with my chips thinking about sizing and V1 says "full house good buddy"...
Playing Bingo (which is one of many methods you can use) works just fine in most line-ups. If you're in a line-up where it won't remotely work, then it is actually kinda doubtful you're in a game that you're going to be able to win at anyways (cuz in high rake environments we need other players to be making mistakes, both small ones that add up over time as well as the occasional big one, often).
GcluelessBingonoobG
It's really the height of hubris and delusion to think that a game can't be beaten if playing BINGO won't work.
Or maybe what you're really saying that in order for YOU to be a winning player, your opponents all need to play so badly that someone who buys-in short, plays in a high rake game, and plays 2005 ABC poker can be his very own crusher. Lo and behold--you actually claim to have a player pool of seemingly limitless droolers from which you can mindlessly print money.
Extraordinary claims usually require extraordinary proof.
I'd raise turn. No one is going to put us on 22. We're praying someone has Qx or picked up the BDFD. Those hands aren't folding, but pretty much everything else is when V1 bets almost full pot, whether we flat call or raise. We want to build the pot, not give anyone a free look at the river.
With V's speech play, after flatting the turn, I think we can over-bet, to make it look like we were on a flush draw that missed. Might go $200.
It's really the height of hubris and delusion to think that a game can't be beaten if playing BINGO won't work.
Or maybe what you're really saying that in order for YOU to be a winning player, your opponents all need to play so badly that someone who buys-in short, plays in a high rake game, and plays 2005 ABC poker can be his very own crusher. Lo and behold--you actually claim to have a player pool of seemingly limitless droolers from which you can mindlessly print money.
Extraordinary clai
In order for anyone to win at most low stakes / small BI / high rake games, they need a large percentage of their opponents to be pretty poor players. Otherwise it's going to be pretty difficult to beat these types of games regardless of what style you are using.
This is at least the second time you've brought up the validity of my results (which aren't even all that impressive, tbh). I just posted 15 years worth of my yearly results in the Winrates thread (odd, I don't see your results being posted, I must have missed them?) and I've consistently posted 1000 hour results updates (good / bad / ugly) over 6000+ hours in my Well thread. I honestly don't know why I've put up with you for so long, but it won't be much longer.
GfingerhoversovertheIgnoreListbutton...G
In order for anyone to win at most low stakes / small BI / high rake games, they need a large percentage of their opponents to be pretty poor players. Otherwise it's going to be pretty difficult to beat these types of games regardless of what style you are using.
This is at least the second time you've brought up the validity of my results (which aren't even all that impressive, tbh). I just posted 15 years worth of my yearly results in the Winrates thread (odd, I don't see your results being p
Anyone can post anything online. None of it is proof. When people make extraordinary claims without evidence, it's much more likely to be something other than the unvarnished truth.
Feel free to block me or anyone who challenges you, although it's kind of bizarre you believe that anyone would care if you block them...like I'm going to be sad if some rando is unable to see my posts?
Ibelieveverylittleofwhatyoutypeandthisisn'tmyfirstrodeoherE
Life is too short to deal with *******s.
GwelcometomyIgnoreListG
Banana's threads once again bringing forum members closer together...
Anyone can post anything online. None of it is proof. When people make extraordinary claims without evidence, it's much more likely to be something other than the unvarnished truth.
What’s so extraordinary about claiming a $20/hr win rate at 1-3 over 6000 hours spread over 15 years? The level of play in these games is atrocious, especially in the smaller rooms.
What WOULD be extraordinary is someone whose delusional fantasy life is centered around…having a $20/hr win rate at 1-3 over 6000 hours spread over 15 years. Claiming to have won 20 teddy bears a year for 15 years at state fairs while rereading DFW’s Getting Away…From It All for the thousandth time wouldn’t be as sad or crazy.
1.25 tbs per DFW reading is far from shameful.
